Additional Ideas to Incorporate in an Objection

On an unaccredited basis I have received the following thoughts on the proposal which people may like to incorporate in their objections.

1. The development would have an adverse impact on local views and landscape character in the following ways:
1.1 The proposal would encroach on the open gap between Hassocks and Hurstpierpoint which is important to prevent the physical and visual coalescence of the built up areas.
1.2 The development would be visible from the golf course, the ridge to the south and the public footpaths which cross the area.
1.3 The report makes a point that the existing houses on London Road are not well screened from the adjacent fields and that the development would provide an opportunity to soften this edge with new green infrastructure in the form of open space. The proposed new houses would be more prominent in the landscape as they would be at a higher elevation and the proposed landscape treatment would not adequately mitigate this impact. A belt of tree planting a minimum of 20m wide would be required to mitigate the proposals from local viewpoints. The intrinsic character of this landscape is of a patchwork of fields and well treed hedges, which would be strengthened by the proposal, but would not provide sufficient mitigation for the visual impact of the development.

2. The application is premature in relation to the emerging Neighbourhood Plan. This will identify the optimum locations for new development and also the location for new recreational facilities including informal open space and formal facilities such as playing fields. The area subject to the planning application would have potential to provide Green Infrastructure as part of an accessible green network around the village which links with the golf course, playing field and the stream and public footpaths around the north of the village.

Sample objection

One of our supporters posted the following objection and asked for it to be shared as an example of the approach you might adopt.

"The area of land proposed is not considered acceptable for any development, there are many real issues which should be considered.

The land has a historic background with  archaeological evidence of a Roman road running through the north field. I personally have found artefacts in an around my garden including a remnants of a roman road. therefore a full archaeological survey should be carried out.

There are also historic hedgerows and trees some which have protection orders. The proposal shows that the road through the site will run through the hedgerow to join the 2 fields. it should be noted that on the historic maps the hedgerow is shown to run the full length of the fields. this used to be the case until the present owner and the developers whilst surveying the land cut down and destroyed it so as to enable the route of the road for the development. This must be considered as being a criminal act and action taken against the developer and owner.

The environmental impact of the build must be considered as there is proven evidence of various protected species including Great Crested Newts, Barn Owls, Badgers, bats, door mice and field mice. The area also has flora and fauna which is protected and is ancient in origin.

The land is quite clearly visible from the peaks of the South Downs and will in fact reduce the wonderful views of the SDNP.

Having lived adjacent to the land for the last 14 years I and my family and others who visit are subject to the the most wonderful views and some brilliant sunsets. These are the views that we paid extra for when we made the decision to move in, and in what way are we to receive compensation for the loss of this? Also the proposal shows no access to the land as some of our neighbours have prescriptive access to the land.

The other environmental issue involves the Air Pollution. Stonepound Junction which is only yards from the proposed development is subject to an Air Quality Action Plan. This AQAP has been presented to DEFRA and as yet to be accepted as fit enough to deal with the air quality in the area. The proposals presented to DEFRA are inadequate and will in no way prove to lower the levels of Nitrogen dioxide. It must also be noted that the World Health Organisation have recently presented scientific evidence that the real pollutant is PM 2.5 which was initially monitored in 2003/4 and found to be above WHO acceptable levels.

Therefore the rise in traffic due to the proposed development would in no way help to reduce any type of pollutants at this already highly polluted area.

It must be noted that PM 2.5 has been proven to have been the cause of up to 29,000 deaths in this country and also  230000 in Europe. I personally suffer from a respiratory disease and have a real understanding of its effects.

The proposal will also add over 200 to 300 more vehicles to the already high traffic numbers. The area is already mis-managed by the WSDC Traffic department due to the lack of consideration of other recently agreed developments. A professional execution of traffic modelling should be carried out immediately and then after the agreed new build at College Lane.

Residents of this new site will be heading along Hurst Road and through Stonepound Junction to park at the already congested Hassocks Station causing higher levels of traffic and also pollution. Pollution from vehicles are higher when shorter journeys are carried of which these vehicles will.

The proposed development also will significantly lower the strategic Gap between the villages of Hassocks and Hurstpierpoint.  This gap has been already acknowledged as being important in the proposed District Plan. The concept of a village will be reduced if any further erosion of the gap and the area will become an extension of Burgess Hill.

The Village of Hassocks has long been acknowledged as the "Gateway to the South Downs". There will be no countryside left for the "weekenders" from London to escape to, and Hassocks is the only place they will route through to get into the south downs.

Gleeson's the developers mention the economic benefits of more housing.  The area falls into the "Gatwick Diamond" And there seems to be a belief that more housing is required due to the supposed growth of Gatwick Airport. The reality is that Gatwick airport is in fact in decline and passenger levels are lower than ever.

There are no new flights and therefore no new jobs with a some of the airlines reducing employee numbers.

 

The developers plan for the house design is not really compatible with a traditional Sussex Design. I am aware that the recently Completed Clayton Mills Development failed to honour the original design brief and the builders used the most cost effective materials and design rather than fitting in with the local design. It is accepted that any outline plan put forward by the developers will always be more compatible in it's initial design and that the reality of the build is little like the original.

Also although there is proposal is for 93 houses  in this plan the developers have purchased controlling rights on a larger piece of adjacent land west of the proposed development. There would only be one intention in this purchase and that would to petition for a further build which would at least double the size of the this proposal. This would mean at least 200 properties over all and a further erosion of the Strategic Gap.

The Villages of Hassocks and Hurstpierpoint have been subjected to significant housing development and with the associated population rise has come the issue of the local infrastructures failure to cope. My family has personally been affected by this failure. My daughter who requires extra assistance in her development at school was hoping to follow her brother into the village school. When we approached the head she was concerned that due to the significant rise in pupil numbers they may not be able to help her as required. Therefore we were forced to approach another school in an other village who also despite being subject to their own rise in pupil numbers were more confident of their assistance. All we can hope is that she will not be failed.

Also due to my daughters health issues which were caused by a respiratory illness and i think due to the Traffic and air pollution in the area. The local health centre failed to be treat her. Every time we visited the health centre to get treatment (when we could get an appointment) she was seen by a different GP as we would have to go what ever GP was available and at what ever location.

This caused her illness to be mis-diagnosed and therefore the illness caused further health issues.

I would hope that although some of my concerns are personal in nature that my objections are made with complete knowledge of the reality of the governments "localism Act"

Despite this act giving the developers presumption in favour rights. The heart of the localism act is about handing power back to the communities. If this is true and the inspectorate truly understand the nature of the act then this proposed development should be considered in opposition to this act."

Object to the Planning Application

You must object before 13 December 2013 otherwise your objection will not be considered.

You can send your objection by e-mail to:

planninginfo@midsussex.gov.uk 

make sure you include the application reference number 13/03818/OUT.

You can find the application by following this link:

Mid Sussex Planning Register

The application reference number is 13/03818/OUT, but the link should take you straight there.  If you go to the comments tab you can leave your comments there.

You can also send your comments by letter to

Mid Sussex District Council
Oaklands Road
Haywards Heath
RH16 1SS

again you must quote the application reference number 13/03818/OUT.

It is absolutely essential that we achieve as many unique objections as possible, we may repeat what each other say but we must say it in our own words.  Everybody can object, you, your partner, your parents, your children, your Linkedin contacts, your Faceboook Friends - please make sure everybody you know objects.

The Council make some recommendations as to the sort of thing you should consider in your objection:

-The effect of the proposed development on the appearance of the area;
-The quality of the design;
-Significant overbearing impact and loss of outlook;
-The economic benefits of the proposal;
-Highway safety issues;
-Loss of important trees;
-Intrusion into the countryside;
-Significantly increased noise and disturbance;

They also caution that these should not include:

-Loss of view;
-Loss of property value;
-Loss of trade to a competitor;
-Boundary and other disputes with a neighbour;
-Moral, religious issues.

You may want to consider or use the following points in your objection:

Design

The design is particularly light on detail and specifically absent of a clear explanation on site access and the impact that this will have on the congestion experienced in London Road.  In the mornings and evenings delays of over 20 minutes are not uncommon.  Stonepound Crossroads is already recognised as one of the most polluted junctions in Sussex.  The only conceivable point of access is dangerously close to Stonepound Crossroads and is directly next to the intersection with Stanford Avenue and the entrance/exit to the petrol station.

No consideration is given to the existing residents of London Road and the design places new dwellings on the boundaries of existing properties which is overbearing and impinges on their right to light.

The design takes no consideration of the prescriptive easements which have been awarded to several residents.

The design seems to disregard the Tree Preservation Order in respect of 20 individual trees.

The design does not explain that the parcel of land encompasses another field to the west of the planned area of approximately the same area, which presumably will become the subject of a further or modified later application.

Strategic Gap

In every derivation of plan issued by Parish and District Councils the site has been defined as the Strategic Gap between Hassocks and Hurstpierpoint.  This gap was already narrow at 0.9km between the rear gardens of College Lane, Hurstpierpoint and the rear gardens of London Road, Hassocks before approval for a 100 dwelling development at College Lane was granted which will reduce that gap, combined with this proposal there will no longer be a Strategic Gap.

The site is outside the built up area of Hassocks and within a local and strategic gap and is outside the Neighbourhood Plan Area for Hassocks, the site is also within the Countryside Area of Development Restraint (CADR) as defined in the Mid Sussex Local Plan (MSLP).  As such the proposal is contrary to the Mid Sussex Development Plan (MSDP).  In the Housing Supply Plan (published in March 2013) the site was assessed (site reference 286(HA/19) and deemed to be unsuitable on the following grounds:

• Open to landscape issues
• Long range views
• Absence of defensible boundaries
• Will set a precedence for further development and contribute further to the coalescence Hassocks and Hurstpierpoint, proposal conflicts with C3 of the MSLP.

Air Quality

The site is immediately adjacent to the Air Quality Management Area of Stonepound Crossroads which already has Nitrogen Dioxide levels in excess of World Health Organisation permitted levels and dangerously high levels of particulate matter.  Regardless of any statements made by the developer building more dwellings will lead to more cars, more congestion and more pollution.

Traffic Volumes

If you build more dwellings there will be more cars and more congestion as there is no capacity to increase the size of the road.  Other north/south routes are no less problematic, Ditchling, College Lane (already subject of a South Mid Sussex CLC notice) and Cuckfield Road.

Road Traffic and Pedestrian Safety

More traffic increases the potential for fatal accidents involving motorists and pedestrians alike.  There is no safe route from this site to the schools or village.  There are no plans for additional pedestrian crossings.

Historic Importance

• The site is well documented as being part of the Manor of Wickham, the central hedgerow comprising oak trees are several hundred years old and is detailed in a survey dating to 1732 and also the Domesday Book (1086) (http://www.jrnorris.co.uk/Wickhammanor.html).
• The site is adjacent to a Saxon settlement and a desktop archaeological survey is woefully inadequate when so much more could be uncovered
• Many residents have made their own Roman and Saxon finds. 

Inadequacy of Existing and Planned Infrastructure

This is a small community which is already bursting at the seams.  We wait weeks for doctors appointments, we might as well pull our own teeth out, the police presence is practically none existent, the fire station is miles and miles away, the schools are only just building classrooms for the children who live here now, siblings cannot go to the same school and some children cannot even go to the school in the village where they live and must get the train to another town.  How will we accommodate the new house for which planning permission is already granted never mind this application.

Other points to consider

the application will:

• seriously and permanently harm the character of the countryside and adversely affect local tourism which this character attracts;
• be contrary to and prejudicial to the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan;
• have an adverse impact on the setting of the National Park and change the settlement pattern of the area;
• be a further loss of landscape for local residents to enjoy whilst using the public footpath which intersects the land affording views of quintessential English downland countryside;
• increase drainage problems as the water table is already at surface level during much of the year
• overshadow residents and cause a loss of sunlight;
• be detrimental to the other natural residents of the agricultural area barn owls, bats, foxes, badgers, bees, kestrels, all of which are regularly seen;
• be detrimental to the great crested newts on site
• be detrimental to the public at large who have a long history of using the area as common land dating back more than 250 years;
• be a further loss of agricultural land;

Meeting Monday 18 November

We have a meeting scheduled for Monday night 19:30 at the British Legion in Woodsland Road.

Please make every effort to come along, the purpose of the meeting is to ensure people know that Gleeson have made an outline planning application and how you should go about objecting.

We will also need to decided about retaining a professional planning consultant and discussion donations to this fighting fund.

E-mail me directly or via the contact form if you need more information now, otherwise see you Monday.